The electrocardiographic effects of cetirizine in normal subjects

Cardiovascular safety of antihistamines

Histamine is a mediator, which increases the permeability of capillaries during the early phase of allergic reaction, causes smooth muscle contraction of bronchi and stimulates mucous glands in the nasal cavity. Antihistamines are the basis of symptomatic treatment in the majority of allergic diseases, especially allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, urticaria and anaphylaxis. The cardiotoxic effects of the two withdrawn drugs, terfenadine and astemizole, were manifested by prolonged QT intervals and triggering torsades de pointes (TdP) caused by blockade of the ‘rapid’ I_Kr potassium channels. These phenomena, however, are not a class effect. This review deals with a new generation of antihistamine drugs in the context of QT interval prolongation risk.

Histamine, histamine receptors and antihistamines: new concepts

Drugs with antihistamine action are the most commonly prescribed medication in daily dermatologic practice, both to adults and children. This article addresses new concepts of the role of histamine receptors (H1 receptors) and discusses the anti-inflammatory effects of these drugs. Second generation antihistamines differs from first generation because of their high specificity and affinity for peripheral H1-receptors. Second generation antihistamines are also less likely to produce sedation because they have less effect on the central nervous system. Although the efficacy of the various H1-antihistamines in the treatment of allergic patients is similar, even when comparing first- and second-generation drugs, these drugs are still very different in terms of their chemical structure, pharmacology and toxic properties. Consequently, knowledge of their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics is essential for a better medical care, especially that offered to pregnant women, children, the elderly, and patients with comorbidities.

Levocetirizine does not prolong the QT/QTc interval in healthy subjects: results from a thorough QT study

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a thorough QT study of levocetirizine, a non-sedating antihistamine, in accordance with International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E14 guidance.

METHODS

The study was designed as a single-dose, placebo and positive-controlled, four-way crossover, randomised trial in which 52 healthy male and female subjects participated. Levocetirizine (5 and 30 mg) and placebo were administered double-blind, and the positive control, moxifloxacin (400 mg), was open-label. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) were obtained by continuous Holter monitoring at various time points (three per time point) during a 24-h period at baseline and after each treatment. The ECGs were read centrally in a blinded manner. QT intervals were corrected for heart rate using a gender- and study-specific correction (QTcSS) and Fridericia's correction (QTcF). The largest QTc time-matched and baseline-subtracted difference between each active drug and the placebo (largest delta delta QTcSS) was derived from a mixed-effect analysis of variance.

RESULTS

The one-sided 95% upper limits of the largest delta delta QTcSS for levocetirizine were 5.7 ms (5 mg) and 3.9 ms (30 mg), with mean estimates of 2.9 and 1.1 ms, respectively. Similar results were obtained for the delta delta QTcF data. Statistically, moxifloxacin significantly lengthened the QTcSS, with a one-sided 95% lower limit of the largest delta delta QTcSS of 10.5 ms and a mean estimate of 13.4 ms. There was no relationship between the measured delta QTcSS and the plasma concentration of levocetirizine, whereas a statistically significant linear relationship was observed with the plasma concentration of moxifloxacin [slope estimate 0.004 ms/(ng/mL); 95% confidence interval: 0.003-0.005].

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results of this thorough QT study indicate that the methodology of the trial was valid and sensitive enough to demonstrate the absence of effect of levocetirizine at both therapeutic (5 mg) and supra-therapeutic (30 mg) doses on cardiac repolarisation.

The Effect of Antihistamine Cetirizine on Ventricular Repolarization in Congenital Long QT Syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Many drugs are known to block cardiac potassium channels, thus prolonging QT interval and predisposing to malignant arrhythmias. Patients with congenital long QT syndrome are particularly vulnerable, but usually electrophysiological effects of drugs have not been assessed in these patients at risk.

METHODS

Fifteen asymptomatic patients with type 1 (LQT1), 15 patients with type 2 (LQT2) long QT syndrome, and 15 healthy volunteers took a placebo and cetirizine 10 mg. In addition, healthy volunteers took cetirizine 50 mg. The study was single-blinded and randomized. Exercise tests were performed during stable plasma concentrations. The electrocardiogram was recorded with a body surface potential mapping system (BSPM). Data were analyzed with an automated analyze program. QT intervals to the T wave apex and T wave end and their difference (Tp-e) were determined at rest and at specified heart rates during and after exercise.

RESULTS

Cetirizine did not lengthen the QT intervals at rest or during exercise and recovery in any group. It shortened Tp-e at rest in LQT1 and LQT2 patients and during exercise test in LQT1 patients, thus slightly decreasing electrocardiographic transmural dispersion of repolarization.

CONCLUSIONS

Cetirizine does not adversely modify ventricular repolarization in types 1 and 2 long QT syndrome, suggesting that it might be used safely in these long QT syndrome patients.

Possible interethnic differences in quinidine-induced QT prolongation between healthy Caucasian and Korean subjects

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of quinidine-induced QT prolongation in healthy Caucasian and Korean subjects to investigate interethnic differences in susceptibility to drug-induced arrhythmia.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind crossover study was conducted in 24 (12 male and 12 female) Korean and 13 (seven male and six female) Caucasian subjects. After a 20 min infusion of quinidine (4 mg kg(-1)) or saline, the serum concentration of quinidine and the QT interval corrected by Bazett's formula (QTc) were monitored. The dynamic data were analyzed by means of a population modelling approach using NONMEM.

RESULTS

There were no statistical differences in the pharmacokinetic profiles of quinidine between ethnic groups. The QTc values in Caucasians were higher than those in Koreans at the same quinidine concentrations, especially at higher quinidine concentrations and in female subjects. According to an E(max) model [equation: see text], the population modelling approach revealed that E0 (ms) was related to gender (408 + [34*(1 - Sex)]; 1 for male and 0 for female), DeltaE(max) (ms) was related to ethnicity ((136*f(ETHN)) + C(female): f(ETHN) = 1 for Koreans and 1.26 for Caucasians; C(female) was 106 only for Caucasian females), and EC50 was estimated to be 3.13 microm.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that Korean subjects were less sensitive to quinidine-induced QT prolongation than Caucasian subjects, and that this trend was particularly true for females. Further population-based studies are merited to characterize more completely the ethnic differences in drug-induced QT prolongation between Asians and other ethnic groups.

Antihistamines in Dermatology

Along with antibiotics, antihistamines are the most widely used systemic drugs in dermatology. This is attributable to the major role played by histamine in common diseases such as urticaria and atopic eczema. Of the currently recognised four subtypes of G protein-coupled histamine receptors, only the H1 and H2 subtypes have been positively identified in human skin. Traditionally believed to be competitive antagonists of histamine, H1 and H2 antihistamines are now considered to behave as inverse agonists. By consensus, H1 antihistamines are classified as 'first generation' (associated with troublesome side-effects including somnolence, anti-adrenergic and atropine-like actions) and 'second-generation' compounds (in which these side-effects are reduced or absent). The main indications for H1 antihistamines in skin are suppression of pruritus in urticaria and atopic eczema, both of which are associated with increased mast cell numbers and tissue histamine levels. However the evidence basis for use in atopic eczema is ambiguous and controversial, even though these drugs are widely used in practice. Currently, significant side-effects are mainly confined to the first-generation compounds and are especially troublesome in the elderly. Psychomotor impairment may persist throughout the day following administration. Anti-cholinergic and anti-alpha-adrenergic blockade and cardiotoxicity (torsade de pointes) may also occur with first-generation antihistamines. Two early low-sedation second-generation antihistamines caused arrhythmias in a small number of patients but these compounds have now been withdrawn. Generally, the second-generation H1 antihistamines are well tolerated.

Second-Generation Antihistamines

Antihistamines are useful medications for the treatment of a variety of allergic disorders. Second-generation antihistamines avidly and selectively bind to peripheral histamine H1 receptors and, consequently, provide gratifying relief of histamine-mediated symptoms in a majority of atopic patients. This tight receptor specificity additionally leads to few effects on other neuronal or hormonal systems, with the result that adverse effects associated with these medications, with the exception of noticeable sedation in about 10% of cetirizine-treated patients, resemble those of placebo overall. Similarly, serious adverse drug reactions and interactions are uncommon with these medicines. Therapeutic interchange to one of the available second-generation antihistamines is a reasonable approach to limiting an institutional formulary, and adoption of such a policy has proven capable of creating substantial cost savings. Differences in overall efficacy and safety between available second-generation antihistamines, when administered in equivalent dosages, are not large. However, among the antihistamines presently available, fexofenadine may offer the best overall balance of effectiveness and safety, and this agent is an appropriate selection for initial or switch therapy for most patients with mild or moderate allergic symptoms. Cetirizine is the most potent antihistamine available and has been subjected to more clinical study than any other. This agent is appropriate for patients proven unresponsive to other antihistamines and for those with the most severe symptoms who might benefit from antihistamine treatment of the highest potency that can be dose-titrated up to maximal intensity.

Cetirizine: a review of its use in allergic disorders

Cetirizine is a selective, second-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonist, with a rapid onset, a long duration of activity and low potential for interaction with drugs metabolised by the hepatic cytochrome P450 system. Cetirizine was generally more effective than other H1 receptor antagonists at inhibiting histamine-induced wheal and flare responses. Cetirizine is an effective and well tolerated agent for the treatment of symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) in adult, adolescent and paediatric patients. In adults with these allergic disorders, cetirizine was as effective as conventional dosages of ebastine (SAR, PAR, CIU), fexofenadine (SAR), loratadine (SAR, CIU) or mizolastine (SAR). This agent was significantly more effective, and with a more rapid onset of action, than loratadine in 2-day studies in environmental exposure units (SAR). In paediatric patients, cetirizine was as at least as effective as chlorphenamine (chlorpheniramine) [SAR], loratadine (SAR, PAR) and oxatomide (CIU) in the short term, and more effective than oxatomide and ketotifen (PAR) in the long term. Cetirizine was effective in reducing symptoms of allergic asthma in adults and reduced the relative risk of developing asthma in infants with atopic dermatitis sensitised to grass pollen or house dust mite allergens. It had a corticosteroid-sparing effect in infants with severe atopic dermatitis and was effective in ameliorating reactions to mosquito bites in adults. Cetirizine was well tolerated in adults, adolescents and paediatric patients with allergic disorders. In adult, adolescent and paediatric patients aged 2-11 years, the incidence of somnolence with cetirizine was dose related and was generally similar to that with other second-generation H1 receptor antagonists. Although, its sedative effect was greater than that of fexofenadine in some clinical trials and that of loratadine or fexofenadine in a postmarketing surveillance study. In infants aged 6-24 months, the tolerability profile of cetirizine was similar to that of placebo. Cetirizine did not have any adverse effects on cognitive function in adults, or cognitive function, behaviour or achievement of psychomotor milestones in paediatric patients. Cetirizine was not associated with cardiotoxicity.

CONCLUSION

Cetirizine is well established in the treatment of symptoms of SAR, PAR or CIU. It demonstrated a corticosteroid-sparing effect and reduced the relative risk of developing asthma in sensitised infants with atopic dermatitis. Cetirizine was effective in the treatment of allergic cough and mosquito bites; however, its precise role in these indications has yet to be clearly established. On the basis of its favourable efficacy and tolerability profile and rapid onset of action, cetirizine provides an important option for the treatment of a wide range of allergic disorders.

Review of cetirizine hydrochloride for the treatment of allergic disorders

Cetirizine hydrochloride is an orally-active and selective histamine (H(1))-receptor antagonist. It is a second-generation antihistamine and a human metabolite of hydroxyzine. Therefore, its principal effects are mediated via selective inhibition of peripheral H(1) receptors. The antihistaminic activity of cetirizine has been documented in a variety of animal and human models. In vivo and ex vivo animal models have shown negligible anticholinergic and antiserotonergic activity. In clinical studies, however, dry mouth has been seen more commonly with cetirizine than with placebo. In vitro receptor binding studies have shown no measurable affinity for receptors other than H(1) receptors. Auto-radiographical studies with radiolabelled cetirizine in the rat have shown negligible penetration into the brain. Ex vivo experiments in the mouse have shown that systemically administered cetirizine does not significantly occupy cerebral H(1) receptors. Impairment of CNS function is comparable to other low-sedating antihistamines at the recommended dose of 10 mg/day for adults. It has anti-inflammatory properties that may play a role in asthma management. It does not interact with concomitantly administered medications, it has no cardiac adverse effects, and it does not appear to be associated with teratogenicity. Cetirizine is predominantly eliminated by the kidneys with a mean elimination half-life is 8.3 h. It is rapidly absorbed, and significant clinical inhibition of a wheal and flare response occurs in infants, children and adults within 20 min of a single oral dose and persists for 24 h. No tolerance to the wheal and flare response occurs even after 1 month of daily treatment. The clinical efficacy of cetirizine for allergic respiratory diseases has been established in numerous trials. There is evidence that cetirizine improves symptoms of urticaria. Concomitant use of cetirizine also decreases the duration and amount of topical anti-inflammatory preparations needed for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Interestingly, several clinical studies suggest that cetirizine may be useful in the treatment and prevention of mild asthma.

Emerging safety issues regarding long-term usage of H(1)receptor antagonists

The second generation histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists are important therapeutic tools in the treatment of atopic disease and may also have a place as an adjunct therapy for those patients whose allergic asthma coexists with allergic rhinitis. They are amongst the most widely prescribed and safest drugs in the world. However, as second generation H(1)-receptor antagonists are used to treat non-life threatening conditions, the risk of adverse effects is of vital importance. For many, the potential for sedation by some of the newer antihistamines still remains an issue, while there have recently been widespread concerns regarding the potential for cardiotoxicity and the impact of drug-drug interactions associated with some second generation H(1)-receptor antagonists. Consequently, progress with this class of drugs should involve not only increased efficacy but also improvements in their safety and specificity. Moreover, there is a trend towards using second generation H(1)-receptor antagonists as long-term therapy rather than confining their use to treating the short-term manifestations of allergic disease. To this end, a number of novel, potent and safe antihistamines have been developed which are either metabolites of active drugs or enantiomers. This review will examine some of the safety issues associated with established and newer second generation drugs particularly in relation to their long-term usage in adults and children.

Next generation antihistamines: therapeutic rationale, accomplishments and advances

Antihistamines, among the most commonly prescribed drugs in the world, have evolved considerably since the first generation was introduced >50 years ago. The first generation antihistamines (e.g., chlorpheniramine, diphenhydramine, promethazine and hydroxyzine) are still widely available and in use today. These drugs have considerable sedative effects caused by their ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. The next generation of antihistamines to emerge in the market were devoid of these sedative effects; however, two (terfenadine and astemizole) have shown rare but lethal cardiotoxic side effects. The third generation antihistamines, metabolites of the earlier drugs, have demonstrated no cardiac effects of the parent drugs and are at least as potent. Many have exhibited superior pharmacokinetic and pharmacological profiles, including an improved onset of action and duration of effect. The clinical benefit of these newer oral antihistamines will clearly help improve the quality of life of patients with chronic allergies.

Cardiotoxicity of new antihistamines and cisapride

Although the new second-generation nonsedative antihistamines terfenadine and astemizole were launched as highly selective and specific H(1)-receptor antagonists, they were later found to cause prolongation of the QT-interval and severe cardiac arrhythmias. The prolongation of the QT-interval is caused by the blockade of one or more of the cardiac potassium channels, among which the delayed rectifier I(Kr), encoded by the HERG-gene, appears to be the most significant. The potency of the prokinetic drug cisapride to block I(Kr) appears to be similar to that of terfenadine (IC(50) about 50 nmol/l). These drugs cause problems when overdosed, used in combination with inhibitors of their CYP3A4-mediated metabolism, or when given to individuals with altered drug kinetics (the aged) or patients with existing cardiac disease (congenitally long QT). Moreover, interactions with other QT-interval prolonging drugs require special attention. Active hydrophilic metabolites of the second-generation antihistaminic compounds (ebastine-carebastine, loratadine-desloratadine, terfenadine-fexofenadine, astemizole-norastemizole) are new compounds with probably reduced risk for drug interactions and cardiac toxicity.

Cetirizine/pseudoephedrine

Cetirizine is the carboxylated metabolite of hydroxyzine, and has high specific affinity for histamine H(1) receptors. Pseudoephedrine is a sympathomimetic drug that acts directly on alpha-adrenergic receptors. black triangle Cetirizine/pseudoephedrine 5/120 mg twice daily was significantly more effective than intranasal budesonide 100 microg or placebo at improving nasal obstruction, nasal patency and reducing the volume of nasal secretion, and was significantly more effective than intranasal xylometazoline 0.1% with respect to nasal secretion, during house dust mite faeces challenge in three randomised, cross- over studies among volunteers with seasonal or perennial rhinitis. The onset of action of cetirizine/pseudoephedrine was reported to be approximately 30 minutes. black triangle The bioavailability of cetirizine and pseudoephedrine is similar after administration of cetirizine/pseudoephedrine 5/120 mg bilayer tablets or coadministration of cetirizine 5 mg tablets plus pseudoephedrine sustained-release (SR) 120 mg caplets. black triangle Cetirizine 5mg plus pseudoephedrine SR 120 mg twice daily for 2 to 3 weeks was significantly more effective than each drug given alone at reducing mean total symptom scores for seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis in two randomised, double-blind, multicentre trials. In both studies, the mean proportion of days during which the five measured symptoms (nasal obstruction, sneezing, rhinorrhoea, nasal pruritus and ocular pruritus) were absent or mild was significantly greater in recipients of the cetirizine plus pseudoephedrine SR. black triangle In one study, cetirizine 5 mg plus pseudoephedrine SR 120 mg was significantly more effective at reducing nasal obstruction than either drug alone. black triangle Cetirizine 5mg plus pseudoephedrine SR 120 mg twice daily for 2 to 3 weeks was well tolerated in patients with seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis. The most common adverse events were dry mouth, insomnia, headache, somnolence, asthenia and nervousness.

Effects of supratherapeutic doses of ebastine and terfenadine on the QT interval

AIMS

The objective of this study was to compare the effects of high doses of ebastine with terfenadine and placebo on QTc.

METHODS

Thirty-two subjects were randomly assigned to four treatments (ebastine 60 mg x day(-1), ebastine 100 mg x day(-1), terfenadine 360 mg x day(-1), placebo) administered for 7 days. Serial ECGs were performed at baseline and day 7 of each period. QT interval was analysed using both Bazett (QTcB) and Fridericia (QTcF) corrections.

RESULTS

Ebastine 60 mg (+ 3.7 ms) did not cause a statistically significant change in QTcB compared with placebo (+ 1.4 ms). The mean QTcB for ebastine 100 mg was increased by + 10.3 ms which was significantly greater than placebo but was significantly less (P < 0.05) than with terfenadine 360 mg (+ 18.0 ms). There were no statistically significant differences in QTcF between ebastine 60 mg (-3.2 ms) or ebastine 100 mg (1.5 ms) and placebo (-2.1 ms); although terfenadine caused a 14.1 ms increase which was significantly different from the other three treatments. The increase in QTcB with ebastine most likely resulted from overcorrection of the small drug-induced increase in heart rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Ebastine at doses up to five times the recommended therapeutic dose did not cause clinically relevant changes in QTc interval.

New insights into the second generation antihistamines

Second generation antihistamines are recognised as being highly effective treatments for allergy-based disease and are among the most frequently prescribed and safest drugs in the world. However, consideration of the therapeutic index or the benefit/risk ratio of the H1 receptor antagonists is of paramount importance when prescribing this class of compounds as they are used to treat non-life threatening conditions. There are many second generation antihistamines available and at first examination these appear to be comparable in terms of safety and efficacy. However, the newer antihistamines in fact represent a heterogeneous group of compounds, having markedly differing chemical structures, adverse effects, half-life, tissue distribution and metabolism, spectrum of antihistaminic properties, and varying degrees of anti-inflammatory effects. With regard to the latter, there is growing awareness that some of these compounds might represent useful adjunct medications in asthma therapy. In terms of safety issues, the current second generation grouping includes compounds with proven cardiotoxic effects and others with the potential for adverse drug interactions. Moreover, some of the second generation H1 antagonists have given cause for concern regarding their potential to cause a degree of somnolence in some individuals. It can be argued, therefore, that the present second generation grouping is too large and indistinct since this was based primarily on the concept of separating the first generation sedating compounds from nonsedating H1 antagonists. Although it is too early to talk about a third generation grouping of antihistamines, future membership of such a classification could be based on a low volume of distribution coupled with a lack of sedating effects, drug interactions and cardiotoxicity.

Safety of antihistamines in children

The histamine H1 receptor antagonists (antihistamines) are an important class of medications used for the relief of common symptoms associated with hyperhistaminic conditions occurring in children and adults. This group of drugs may be subdivided into 3 classes, or generations, based upon their propensity to induce sedation and cardiotoxicity. The first generation (classical) antihistamines are highly effective in treating hyperhistaminic conditions. However, they frequently induce sedation and may adversely affect a child's learning ability. First generation antihistamine-induced sedation has been described to occur in more than 50% of patients receiving therapeutic dosages. Serious adverse events are unusual following overdoses of first generation antihistamines although life-threatening adverse events have been described. When the so-called 'second generation' antihistamines terfenadine and astemizole were introduced they were widely embraced and quickly used by clinicians of all specialities, including paediatricians, as nonsedating alternatives to the first generation compounds. These new agents were found to be equally or more effective than first generation antihistamines in relieving symptoms associated with hyperhistaminic conditions without the soporific effects of the first generation agents. Unfortunately, after approximately 10 years of widespread clinical use, disturbing reports of potentially life-threatening dysrhythmias, specifically torsades de pointes, were described. Both terfenadine and astemizole have been shown in vitro to inhibit several ion channels, and in particular the delayed outward rectifier potassium channel in the myocardium, predisposing the heart to dysrhythmias. The potential life-threatening cardiotoxicities of the second generation antihistamines led to the search for noncardiotoxic and nonsedating agents. Loratadine, fexofenadine, mizolastine, ebastine, azelastine and cetirizine are the first of the new third generation antihistamines. These drugs have been shown to be efficacious with few adverse events including no clinically relevant cytochrome P450 mediated metabolic-based drug-drug interactions or QT interval prolongation/cardiac dysrhythmias. Appropriate treatment of an antihistamine overdose depends upon which class of compound has been ingested. There is no specific antidote for antihistamine overdose and treatment is supportive particularly for ingestions of first generation compounds. Ingestion of excessive doses of terfenadine or astemizole requires immediate medical attention. Children who accidentally ingest excessive doses of a third generation compound may usually be adequately managed at home. However, patients ingesting large amounts (approximately >3 to 4 times the normal therapeutic daily dose) should receive medical attention. These patients should be monitored for 2 to 3 hours after the ingestion and patients ingesting cetirizine should be advised about the potential for sedation. The availability of newer generation antihistamine compounds has clearly added to the clinical effectiveness and patient tolerance of a widely prescribed class of drugs. These advances have also been accompanied by improved safety profiles, particularly in the case of third generation antihistamine overdose.

Stereoselective halofantrine disposition and effect: concentration-related QTc prolongation

AIMS

1) To characterize the variability of multiple-dose halofantrine pharmacokinetics over time in healthy adults, 2) to correlate the pharmacodynamic measure electrocardiographic (ECG) QT interval with (+)- and (-)-halofantrine plasma concentration and 3) to evaluate the safety and tolerance of halofantrine hydrochloride given over time to healthy adults.

METHODS

Twenty-one healthy subjects were enrolled and 13 completed the study (180 days). Subjects received either 500 mg of racemic halofantrine once daily in the fasted state for 42 days, or placebo, and then halofantrine washout was documented for the following 138 days. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (ECG QTc) measurements were obtained.

RESULTS

Mean accumulation half-times (days) for halofantrine were: 7.0 +/- 4.8 [(+)-halofantrine] and 7.3 +/- 4.8 [(-)-halofantrine]. Mean steady-state concentrations were: 97.6 +/- 52.0 ng ml(-1) [(+)-halofantrine] and 48.5 +/- 20.8 [(-)-halofantrine]. Steady-state oral clearance was: 139 +/- 73 l h(-1) [(+)-halofantrine] and 265 +/- 135 l h(-1) [(-)-halofantrine]. Peak plasma concentrations of both (+)- and (-)-halofantrine were attained at 6 h and maximal ECG QTc prolongation was at 4-8 h following drug administration. Fourteen of 16 subjects who received active drug had ECG QTc prolongation that was positively correlated with both (+)- and (-)-halofantrine concentration. The five subjects who received placebo had no demonstrable change in ECG QTc throughout the study. Conclusions Halofantrine accumulates extensively and shows high intersubject pharmacokinetic variability, is associated with concentration-related ECG QTc prolongation in healthy subjects, and is clinically well tolerated in this subject group.

Predictors of Torsades de Pointes in rabbit ventricles perfused with sedating and nonsedating histamine H1-receptor antagonists

Several nonsedating histamine H1-receptor antagonists are associated with torsades de pointes ventricular tachycardia. The objectives of this study were to: (i) compare electrocardiographic, monophasic action potential, and arrhythmogenic effects of sedating and nonsedating H1-receptor antagonists, and (ii) identify correlates of drug-induced torsades de pointes in an isolated ventricle model. Isolated, electrically paced (1-3 Hz) rabbit ventricles were Langendorff-perfused with either drug-free Tyrode's solution or one of the following: (i) the sedating H1-receptor antagonist hydroxyzine (0.1-30 µM), (ii) cetirizine, a nonsedating metabolite of hydroxyzine (1-300 µM), and (iii) the nonsedating, putatively arrhythmogenic H1-receptor antagonist astemizole (0.1-30 µM). Volume conducted electrocardiographic signals and monophasic action potentials from the periapical left ventricular endocardium and epicardium were recorded. There were no apparent changes in control (n = 15) or hydroxyzine-perfused (n = 7) hearts. Cetirizine (n = 13) produced a mild biphasic electrocardiographic QT interval prolongation and was associated with early afterdepolarizations, but not with torsades de pointes. Astemizole (n = 11) lengthened QT intervals, and at high concentration (30 µM) induced torsades de pointes in 10 of 11 hearts (P < 0.001 vs. all other groups). These findings are consistent with previously reported repolarizing current inhibition by cetirizine, but may additionally indicate "compensatory" inhibition of inward currents at higher concentrations. By contrast, astemizole-induced changes are consistent with unopposed repolarizing current inhibition.

Key words: Langendorff preparation, rabbit ventricle, H1-receptor antagonists, QT interval, ventricular arrhythmias.

H1-receptor antagonists: safety issues

Histamine is an important neurotransmitter. Old (first-generation) H1-receptor antagonists such as chlorpheniramine, diphenhydramine, or triprolidine produce histamine blockade at H1-receptors in the central nervous system (CNS) and frequently cause somnolence or other CNS adverse effects. New (second generation) H1-antagonists such as cetirizine, fexofenadine, and loratadine represent an advance in therapeutics; in manufacturers' recommended doses, they enter the CNS in smaller amounts, produce relatively little somnolence or other CNS adverse effects, and do not exacerbate the adverse CNS effects of alcohol or other CNS-active chemicals. Two H1-antagonists, astemizole and terfenadine, have been found to prolong the QTc interval and, rarely, to cause cardiac dysrhythmias after overdose or under other specific conditions. This has led to withdrawal of regulatory approval for them. An H1-antagonist absolutely free from adverse effects under all circumstances is not yet available for use.

Impact of cetirizine on the burden of allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

The goals of this article include the reporting of the epidemiology, economic and medical impact of allergic rhinitis. In addition, the pharmacology and clinical profile of the therapeutic agent cetirizine are reviewed.

DATA SOURCES

A detailed literature search was conducted. References are limited to the English language and human subjects and tissues. Studies considered relevant and important over the past 20 years are highlighted.

STUDY SELECTION

Prevalence and morbidity data were chosen from more recent assessments. Because cetirizine is a relatively new compound, studies from the past several years from peer-reviewed journals have been emphasized.

RESULTS

Allergic rhinitis affects between 15% and 25% of the US general population. It shares common pathophysiologic mechanisms with conjunctivitis and asthma and predisposes to nasal infections, otitis media, sinusitis, nasal polyposis, and orthodontic malocclusions. Direct medical care costs amount to up to 3 billion dollars every year. In addition, the quality of life of affected individuals is substantially compromised. Cetirizine is a potent H1-receptor antagonist and has anti-inflammatory properties. It does not interact with concomitantly administered medications, has no cardiac adverse effects, and does not appear to be associated with teratogenicity. Impairment of CNS function is comparable to other low-sedating antihistamines at the recommended dose of 10 mg daily for adults. Its clinical efficacy for allergic respiratory diseases has been established in numerous trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergic rhinitis causes considerable suffering. Cetirizine, with a fine risk-benefit ratio, can be a most valuable therapeutic option.

The metabolism of antihistamines and drug interactions: the role of cytochrome P450 enzymes

The non-sedating antihistamines show a diversity of fates in the body and the parent drugs and metabolites may differ in their biological properties. Clinically significant interactions with inhibitors of cytochrome P450 have been reported primarily for terfenadine, which has the potential for cardiac toxicity, and is metabolized to fexofenadine, an antihistamine without cardiac effects. Astemizole shares many of these characteristics and important safety-related interactions are likely. Loratadine undergoes extensive metabolism so that pharmacokinetic interactions could occur, but they would be of little clinical importance because of the lack of cardiac activity of the parent drug and its metabolites. Ebastine also undergoes pharmacokinetic interactions, the significance of which is dependent on clarification of the extent of any relevant cardiotoxicity of both ebastine and its metabolite. Interactions would not be clinically important for cetirizine and fexofenadine which do not show cardiac effects and are eliminated with little metabolism.

Arrhythmogenic mechanisms of non-sedating antihistamines

Antihistamines (H1-receptor antagonists) are amongst the most frequently prescribed drugs worldwide for the treatment of allergic conditions. Recently, there have been reports that certain non-sedating antihistamines, mainly terfenadine and astemizole, might be associated with the risk of rare but severe arrhythmias, namely torsades de pointes, particularly in overdosage, concomitant ingestion of imidazole or macrolide antibiotics and in patients with underlying cardiac or liver diseases. It has now been shown that the molecular target in human ventricle for the potassium channel blockade of antihistamine is HERG gene located in chromosome 7 that expresses the delayed rectifier IKr and appears to be involved in the congenital long QT syndrome. Mechanistic studies showed that blockade of IKr channels by these drugs leads to prolongation of the monophasic action potential (QT interval on surface electrocardiogram) which may then induce the development of early after-depolarization and dispersion of repolarisation leading to torsades de pointes through re-entry mechanism. There are still many questions that need to be answered such as the roles of other potassium channels (IKs, Ito, and Iped) and the relative expression of various potassium channels in different individuals which may be important in the pathogenesis of torsades de pointes with non-sedating antihistamines. There is also a lack of information on the cardiac actions of newer non-sedating antihistamines. It is hoped that with a better understanding of the arrhythmogenic mechanism of non-sedating antihistamines, one will be able to identify those at risk patients and prevent any cardiac toxicity associated with antihistamines and ultimately death.

QT interval monitoring during clinical studies with mizolastine, a new H1 antihistamine

BACKGROUND

Some H1 antihistamines are at risk for rare but severe dysrhythmias due to an effect on the ventricular repolarization.

OBJECTIVE

To present an overview of the QT interval monitoring performed during the clinical development of mizolastine, a new selective second-generation H1 antihistamine.

METHODS

The ECGs database analysis of clinical studies conducted in volunteers and patients is summarized and focused on the results of reported studies and studies specifically designed for the assessment of the effect of mizolastine on cardiac repolarization, through the QT interval measurements. Mizolastine was orally administered up to 75 mg single dose and 40 mg repeated dose in healthy volunteers (i.e. 7. 5 and 4 times the recommended dose, respectively) and at a dose of 10 or 15 mg in patients.

RESULTS

In healthy volunteers, no increased incidence of QTc values >440 msec or DeltaQTc >/=40 msec were recorded compared to placebo. No dose-related increase in QTc interval was observed. The ECG parameters were not modified by the co-administration of mizolastine with digoxin, diltiazem and erythromycin, when compared to the effect of each co-administered drug alone. In patients, the mean QTc interval changes from baseline did not significantly differ from placebo. In comparative studies vs. loratadine a similar incidence of out of range values was observed with mizolastine and loratadine.

CONCLUSION

ECG monitoring of volunteers and patients included in clinical studies conducted with mizolastine showed no significant effect of mizolastine on cardiac repolarization.

Study of cardiac repolarization in healthy volunteers performed with mizolastine, a new H1-receptor antagonist

AIMS

The occurrence of serious dysrhythmias, such as torsades de pointes, with terfenadine and astemizole had led to a reexamination of the potential effect of H1 antihistamines on cardiac repolarization. Mizolastine is a potent, selective, nonsedating peripherally acting H1-receptor antagonist which is registered for rhinitis and urticaria at a recommended dose of 10 mg once daily. The present study was carried out to investigate the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of mizolastine, on ventricular repolarization in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Twenty-four healthy young volunteers participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised study with three parallel groups. Each group consisted of 2 way cross-over 7 day treatment periods where mizolastine (10, 20 or 40 mg) and placebo were randomly administered. On day 1 and day 7, 12-lead ECG recordings were performed prior and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 20 h after dosing and from day 2 to day 6, before dosing and 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after.

RESULTS

Whatever the analysis used (raw data, changes from baseline, incidence of individual out-of-range values) no significant differences were observed at any dose level vs placebo, on any of ECG parameters (HR, PR, QRS, QT, and QTc). In particular, no effect of mizolastine vs placebo was shown on QT and QTc although 95% CIs were wide. The only subject who exhibited a QTc>/=450 ms received placebo for 7 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no evidence of an effect of mizolastine up to 40 mg (four times the therapeutic dose) on ventricular repolarization in healthy volunteers.

Second-generation antihistamines: the risk of ventricular arrhythmias

Some second-generation antihistamines, notably terfenadine and astemizole, have been associated with prolongation of the QT interval and the development of torsades de pointes, a potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmia. This rare adverse event has been associated with greatly elevated blood levels of these agents, resulting from drug overdose, hepatic insufficiency (dysfunction), or interactions with other drugs that inhibit their metabolism. This paper reviews the data concerning the effects of selected second-generation antihistamines on cardiac conduction, particularly the QT interval, to evaluate whether ventricular arrhythmias are a class effect of these agents. Electrocardiographic studies indicate that terfenadine and astemizole, but not loratadine or cetirizine, prolong the QT interval in laboratory animals. In vitro studies demonstrate that terfenadine and astemizole block the cardiac K+ channels, leading to delayed ventricular repolarization and QT-interval prolongation; in contrast, neither loratadine nor its metabolite, desloratadine, significantly inhibits cardiac K+ channels at clinically achievable blood levels. Studies in human volunteers confirm the absence of electrocardiographic effects of azelastine, cetirizine, fexofenadine, and loratadine administered at several times the recommended dose or concomitantly with agents that inhibit their metabolism and elimination. In conclusion, the data indicate that the potential to cause ventricular arrhythmias is not a class effect of second-generation antihistamines and that loratadine, cetirizine, azelastine, and fexofenadine are not associated with torsades de pointes or other ventricular arrhythmias.

"Conventional" antihistamines slow cardiac repolarization in isolated perfused (Langendorff) feline hearts

We examined the effects of "conventional" antihistamines on cardiac repolarization by using the isolated perfused feline heart model. Representative drugs from the major classes of antihistamines were tested. Each of the antihistamines evaluated in this study elicited a dose-dependent slowing of cardiac repolarization, as indicated by the QT prolongations observed from electrocardiogram (ECG) tracings recorded during these experiments. The concentrations of drugs tested ranged from 1 to 30 microM. Of the drugs analyzed, clemastine and hydroxyzine appeared to be the most potent (relative EC50 values, 5.2 and 6.6 microM, respectively), causing the QT to lengthen by as much as 40-50% at a concentration of 10 microM. Brompheniramine, chlorpheniramine, and diphenhydramine displayed intermediate potencies with respect to QT prolongation (relative EC50 values, 11-13 microM), whereas cyproheptadine, chlorcyclizine, and promethazine were the least potent of the antihistamines tested (relative EC50 values, 16-20 microM). It is concluded that the antihistamines evaluated in this study act directly on the heart to slow cardiac repolarization. These findings could have important clinical relevance for patients taking excessive dosages of conventional antihistamines and those at risk of developing cardiac arrhythmias.

Molecular basis for the lack of HERG K+ channel block-related cardiotoxicity by the H1 receptor blocker cetirizine compared with other second-generation antihistamines

In the current study, the potential blocking ability of K+ channels encoded by the human ether-a-go-go related gene (HERG) by the piperazine H1 receptor antagonist cetirizine has been examined and compared with that of other second-generation antihistamines (astemizole, terfenadine, and loratadine). Cetirizine was completely devoid of any inhibitory action on HERG K+ channels heterologously expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes in concentrations up to 30 microM. On the other hand, terfenadine and astemizole effectively blocked HERG K+ channels with nanomolar affinities (the estimated IC50 values were 330 and 480 nM, respectively), whereas loratadine was approximately 300-fold less potent (IC50 approximately 100 microM). In addition, in contrast to terfenadine, cetirizine did not show use-dependent blockade. In SH-SY5Y cells, a human neuroblastoma clone that constitutively expresses K+ currents carried by HERG channels (IHERG), as well as in human embryonic kidney 293 cells stably transfected with HERG cDNA, extracellular perfusion with 3 microM cetirizine did not exert any inhibitory action on IHERG. Astemizole (3 microM), on the other hand, was highly effective. Terfenadine (3 microM) caused a marked (approximately 80%) inhibition of IHERG in SH-SY5Y cells, whereas loratadine, at the same concentration, caused a 40% blockade. Furthermore, the application of cetirizine (3 microM) on the intracellular side of the membrane of HERG-transfected human embryonic kidney 293 cells did not affect IHERG, whereas the same intracellular concentration of astemizole caused a complete block. The results of the current study suggest that second-generation antihistamines display marked differences in their ability to block HERG K+ channels. Cetirizine in particular, which possesses more polar and smaller substituent groups attached to the tertiary amine compared with other antihistamines, lacks HERG-blocking properties, possibly explaining the absence of torsade de pointes ventricular arrhythmias associated with its therapeutical use.

Milestones in the biology and pharmacology of H1-receptor antagonists

Daniele Bovet's pioneering discovery that a series of compounds possessing anti-histamine activity reduced the symptoms of anaphylaxis provided the proof that histamine plays a pivotal role as a mediator of allergic reactions. Basophils and mast cells are the major sources of histamine in man and they are thus one of the primary effector cells of allergic inflammation. Some H1-receptor antagonists possess a variety of antiinflammatory activity to H1 antagonism in vitro and in vivo. This promising area should be explored further and much remains to be done in the evaluation of the immunomodulatory effects of anti-histamines.

Antihistamines in the treatment of asthma

Antihistamines were investigated for use in asthma shortly after discovery over fifty years ago. Earlier compounds proved ineffective because of side effects: this class of drugs was not thought useful for asthma, and were actually considered contraindicated. More recent drugs have greater potency, fewer side-effects, and no evidence of adverse effects in asthma. There are some studies showing second generation antihistamines, especially cetirizine, improve certain parameters of asthma.

Grapefruit juice alters terfenadine pharmacokinetics, resulting in prolongation of repolarization on the electrocardiogram

OBJECTIVES

To establish whether the pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic pharmacodynamics of terfenadine are affected by concomitant administration of grapefruit juice and to determine whether any effect of grapefruit juice is dependent on the timing of administration in relation to the dose of terfenadine.

METHODS

Twelve healthy volunteers were studied in a prospective randomized trial. The primary end points were QT prolongation on the surface electrocardiogram and the pharmacokinetic parameters: area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), maximum concentration, and time to maximum concentration of terfenadine and its acid metabolite terfenadine carboxylate. All subjects received 60 mg terfenadine twice a day with 240 ml water for 7 days. They were then randomized to drink 240 ml of double-strength grapefruit juice simultaneously with terfenadine (simultaneous group) for an additional 7 days or to drink the same dose of grapefruit juice 2 hours after terfenadine for 7 days (delayed group). Twelve timed electrocardiograms and plasma terfenadine and metabolite levels were measured on days 7 and 14.

RESULTS

None of the 12 subjects had quantifiable levels of terfenadine when the drug was administered with water. All six subjects who took terfenadine and drank grapefruit juice simultaneously had quantifiable terfenadine levels. Only two of six who drank grapefruit juice 2 hours after terfenadine had quantifiable levels. The AUC of the acid metabolite increased 55% (p < 0.05) in the simultaneous group and 22% (p = NS) in the delayed group. The mean QT interval increased from 420 to 434 msec (p < 0.05) in the simultaneous group and decreased from 408 to 407 msec (p = NS) in the delayed group.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of grapefruit juice concomitantly with terfenadine may lead to an increase in systemic terfenadine bioavailability and result in increases in QT interval. The clinical significance of an increase in QT interval of this magnitude is unclear.

Comparison of efficacy, safety, and skin test inhibition of cetirizine and astemizole

BACKGROUND

Astemizole, an H1-histamine-receptor antagonist prescribed for seasonal allergic rhinitis, has a slow onset of action and a strong suppressive effect on the wheal and flare reaction, which interferes with skin testing results. The newer antihistamine cetirizine appears to have a rapid onset of action and a low potential to interfere with posttreatment skin testing results.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, safety, and skin test inhibition of astemizole and cetirizine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

In a double-blind, parallel-group study conducted at six sites during ragweed pollination season, 263 subjects were randomized to receive 10 mg of astemizole, 5 mg of cetirizine, or 10 mg of cetirizine daily for 2 weeks. The subjects rated seven allergic rhinitis symptoms daily, the subjects and investigators provided global assessments of the responses to the treatments, and the subjects rated their satisfaction with the treatments. Thirty-nine subjects at one study site underwent quantitative skin testing before and after treatment.

RESULTS

As measured by reduction from baseline in total symptom severity score, which was the primary efficacy measure in the study, all three treatments significantly relieved the symptoms of allergic rhinitis (P less than .05). This finding was supported by the global ratings and the subject satisfaction ratings. There were no significant differences among the three treatments for reduction from baseline in total symptom severity score. The mean subject satisfaction score with 10 mg of cetirizine was significantly greater than that with astemizole (P less than .05). In the skin tests performed 3, 7, and 14 days after the end of antihistamine treatment, the subjects who had received the cetirizine doses had significantly greater mean sum of wheal and mean sum of erythema values than those who had received the astemizole dose (P less than .05). Sensitivity to ragweed pollen extract returned to 90% of baseline within three days of the end of cetirizine treatment. Both drugs were well tolerated and their adverse event profiles were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Astemizole and cetirizine are effective and well tolerated in alleviating the symptoms of ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis. Cetirizine inhibits skin test results to a much lesser extent than does astemizole. Physicians may wish to consider the potential for skin test inhibition when selecting an antihistamine for patients with allergic rhinitis.

Loratadine administered concomitantly with erythromycin: pharmacokinetic and electrocardiographic evaluations

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of coadministration of loratadine and erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic repolarization (QTc) pharmacodynamics of loratadine and its metabolite descarboethoxyloratadine in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Twenty-four healthy volunteers were studied in a prospective, double-blind crossover design while confined in a Clinical Research Center. The primary pharmacodynamic end point of the study was the difference between baseline and day 10 mean QTc intervals obtained from surface electrocardiograms. Plasma concentrations of loratadine, descarboethoxyloratadine, and erythromycin were measured on treatment day 10 for pharmacokinetic analysis. Subjects received in random sequence the following three treatments for 10 consecutive days during three separate study periods: 10 mg loratadine every morning plus 500 mg erythromycin stearate every 8 hours, or 10 mg loratadine every morning plus placebo every 8 hours, or placebo every morning plus 500 mg erythromycin stearate.

RESULTS

Concomitant administration of loratadine and erythromycin was associated with increased plasma concentrations of loratadine (40% increase in area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC]) and descarboethoxyloratadine (46% increase in AUC) compared with loratadine alone. Analysis of variance showed no difference between the treatment groups in effect on QTc intervals compared with baseline, and no significant change from baseline was observed. No clinically relevant changes in the safety profile of loratadine were observed, and there were no reports of sedation nor syncope.

CONCLUSION

Although concomitant administration of loratadine and erythromycin was associated with increased plasma concentrations of loratadine and descarboethoxyloratadine, no clinically relevant changes in the safety profile of loratadine were observed. In this study, 10 mg loratadine administered orally for 10 consecutive days was well tolerated when coadministered with therapeutic doses of erythromycin stearate.